|
|
|
Labaton Sucharow LLP Secures $10 Million Settlement
Class Action News |
2012/02/08 16:26
|
Labaton Sucharow LLP announced a nationwide class action settlement valued at $10 million with All Market, Inc., the leading manufacturer and seller of coconut water in the United States.
Coconut water is one of the fastest growing beverages sold in the United States. Vita Coco markets its coconut water as “super-hydrating,” “nutrient-packed,” “mega-electrolyte,” and healthy “super-water.” Labaton Sucharow filed a proposed nationwide class action, styled Fishbein et al., v. All Market Inc., No. 11-cv-05580, against the company after an independent study revealed that Vita Coco’s products do not contain the electrolyte levels indicated on the products’ labels. The class action complaint alleges that Vita Coco’s coconut water products are mislabeled and do not hydrate more effectively than less expensive sports drinks.
Kellie Lerner, one of the attorneys in the action, stated: “For the millions of consumers who pay for products that claim to improve their health, this settlement sends a message that companies will be held accountable when they exaggerate or misstate the health benefits of their products.”
Labaton Sucharow LLP, with offices in New York City and Wilmington, Delaware, is one of the country’s premier law firms representing institutional investors in class actions and complex securities litigation, as well as consumers and businesses in class actions seeking to recover damages for anticompetitive or deceptive practices. The Firm has been a champion of investor and consumer rights for close to 50 years, seeking recovery of losses and the adoption of necessary corporate governance reforms to protect investors, businesses and consumers. Labaton Sucharow has been recognized for its excellence by the courts and peers. More information about Labaton Sucharow is available at www.labaton.com. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corvallis Criminal Defense Attorneys - Arnold Law Office, LLC
Attorney Blogs |
2012/02/08 14:25
|
Prosecutors are always ready because they handle cases just like yours every day. Our strategy to gain advantage over the prosecution is to enter each settlement negotiation ready and prepared to go over each issue in your case. It is important to know the facts and legal issues better than anyone else in the courtroom because that will give you the edge as a defendant. Choosing to hire our firm means you are hiring a team of lawyers, not just one single person. Our lawyers strategically coordinate, gather evidence and work with experts to meet the demands of your case - Corvallis Criminal Defense Attorneys.
At Arnold Law Office, LLC, our Corvallis criminal defense attorneys treat every case as if it is their most important case. We understand how much is at stake for you and we will provide you with the straight-talking legal counsel you need and deserve. Call us at 541-338-9111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Appeals court: Seniors can't reject Medicare right
Lawyer Blog News |
2012/02/07 16:52
|
A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that seniors who receive Social Security cannot reject their legal right to Medicare benefits, in a rare case of Americans suing to get out of a government entitlement.
Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey is among the five senior citizens who sued to stop their automatic eligibility for Medicare. But the appeals court ruled in a split decision that the law gives them no way to opt out of their eligibility if they want to keep their Social Security benefits.
Armey, a Texas Republican, and his co-plaintiffs say their private insurers limit their coverage because they are eligible for Medicare, but they would prefer the coverage from their private insurers.
"We understand plaintiffs' frustration with their insurance situation and appreciate their desire for better private insurance coverage," Judge Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a majority opinion joined by Douglas Ginsburg, both Republican appointees. But they agreed with the Obama administration that the law says those over age 65 who enroll in Social Security are automatically entitled to Medicare Part A, which covers services including hospital, nursing home care, hospice and home health care.
The case is being funded by a group called The Fund For Personal Liberty, which says its purpose is to take on burdensome government regulations. Attorney Kent Brown, who argued the case for the plaintiffs, say they want to keep their Social Security because they believe they earned it, but none of them want Medicare Part A. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oracle rejects $272M SAP award, wants new trial
Court Feed News |
2012/02/07 15:53
|
Database software maker Oracle is rejecting a court-ordered award for $272 million from German rival SAP, saying it would rather have another trial over SAP's theft of software and customer-support documents.
A jury awarded Oracle Corp. $1.3 billion in the case in November 2010, but a federal judge cut that amount last September. Oracle said then that it would seek a new trial.
In a Monday court filing, the Redwood City, Calif., company says it rejected the award.
SAP AG has admitted that a now-closed subsidiary, TomorrowNow, pilfered Oracle's intellectual property. Oracle argued that this helped SAP undercut Oracle for similar services. SAP said it didn't make much use of the documents and should have to pay only $40 million. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-awaited ruling on CA gay marriage ban due
U.S. Legal News |
2012/02/07 15:53
|
Supporters and opponents of California's ban on same-sex marriage were anxiously awaiting a federal appeals court decision Tuesday on whether the voter-approved measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that considered the question plans to issue its long-awaited opinion 18 months after a trial judge struck down the ban following the first federal trial to examine if same-sex couples have a constitutional right to get married.
The 9th Circuit does not typically give notice of its forthcoming rulings, and its decision to do so Monday reflects the intense interest in the case.
Even if the panel upholds the lower court ruling, it could be a while before same-sex couples can resume marrying in the state. Proposition 8 backers plan to appeal to a larger 9th Circuit panel and then to the U.S. Supreme Court if they lose in the intermediate court. Marriages would likely stay on hold while that process plays out.
The three-judge panel, consisting of judges appointed by presidents Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, heard arguments on the ban's constitutional implications more than a year ago. But it put off a decision so it could seek guidance from the California Supreme Court on whether Proposition 8 sponsors had legal authority to challenge the trial court ruling after California's attorney general and governor decided not to appeal it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ga. court overturns assisted suicide restrictions
Court Feed News |
2012/02/06 17:40
|
Georgia's top court struck down a state law that restricted assisted suicides, siding on Monday with four members of a suicide group who said the law violated their free speech rights.
The Georgia Supreme Court's unanimous ruling found that the law violates the free speech clauses of the U.S. and Georgia constitution. It means that four members of the Final Exit Network who were charged in February 2009 with helping a 58-year-old cancer-stricken man die won't have to stand trial, defense attorneys said.
Georgia law doesn't expressly forbid assisted suicide. But lawmakers in 1994 adopted a law that bans people from publicly advertising suicide, hoping to prevent assisted suicide from the likes of Dr. Jack Kevorkian, the late physician who sparked the national right-to-die debate.
The law makes it a felony for anyone who "publicly advertises, offers or holds himself out as offering that he or she will intentionally and actively assist another person in the commission of suicide and commits any overt act to further that purpose."
The court's opinion, written by Justice Hugh Thompson, found that lawmakers could have imposed a ban on all assisted suicides with no restriction of free speech, or sought to prohibit all offers to assist in suicide that were followed by the act. But lawmakers decided to do neither, he said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|
Lawyer News RSS
